TO READ THE COMPLETE ISSUE OF E&C NEWS

Editorial Comment — March 2014

“REALLY?” ...

Generals, admirals and defense
secretaries come and go, as
political administrations change; and
the legacies they leave are sometimes
impressive, sometimes shoddy.

But undoing more than 147 years
of “at-cost” commissary non-pay compensation
for servicemembers and their
families — that would be a disgrace we
cannot imagine any of them wanting
their names attached to.

Quite frankly, we don't know where
anyone even gets the gall to pull any
corner of the financial rug out from
under the military family, diminishing
their de facto compensation by as
much as 6 or 8 percent, as the recent
proposed cuts to commissary funding
could do.

We do understand, of course, that a
century and a half of tradition is not by
itself a basis for sound policy, and we
also understand that financial pressures
upon DoD are strong and will be long-lasting,
but ... “really?” … has the
commissary benefit endured this long
only to be defunded because times got
tough once again, because leadership
remains ignorant or skeptical regarding
its value, and because DoD's favorite
advisors are ideologically motivated
to cut benefits to the quick?

Or worse yet, because it's the financial
path of least resistance in the
budget?

And what would it net? Just a drop
in the budget bucket — 3/10 of 1 percent.
Again, Really? … Meanwhile,
billions of dollars gush unmolested into
the FW&A account (that's Fraud, Waste
and Abuse, to borrow an accounting
term), and billions of dollars of excess
materiel rots in warehouses.

Perhaps the most telling language
in the current proposal is that which removes
any concern for the needs of the
servicemembers the commissary still
claims to support, and replaces it with
a miserly focus on getting its money
back, legislating in the following manner
a revised primary consideration for
establishing a commissary: striking
the words “needs of members of the
armed forces on active duty and the
needs of dependents of such members”
and inserting the words “feasibility of
cost recovery.”

All in the military community can
form their own opinions of just how
highly their service is appreciated,
and their retention is valued, by those
words.

And when they realize this, we hope
they will see that they need to stand
up and set their leadership straight on
just how valuable their commissary
benefit is.

A few weeks ago, the military community
mobilized against a provision
in a law reducing COLA for young
retirees that could cost an individual
perhaps $80,000, according to some
estimates, over the course of the time
involved. Faced with the uproar, both
houses of Congress and the White
House acted immediately (well, in a
time frame that passes as immediately
for Congress and the White House).
That part of the law was rescinded.

On national television early this
month, a young military wife with three
children told reporters she saved $200
every two weeks by shopping in the
commissary. Over the same period as
the COLA restriction, the proposed
commissary cuts could cost her military
family much more than $80,000.
This uproar should be at least as great.

Don't be fooled by trade-offs for
this or that other benefit — corners that
surveys might try to trick you into. It's
not about benefit trade-offs; it's about
doing what's right by military families
and funding the benefits they have
earned through their service. And about
DeCA continuing to do what it has
done well time and time again — finding
more efficiencies wherever it can
reengineer its operations without harming
the benefit.

We've had it with deceptions and
empty promises. If you have, too, let
your Representatives and your Senators
know what Defense leadership is
trying to get past them, and let them
know that you won't stand for it. It's
time the grass roots get moving before
the budget lawnmower comes.

Generals, admirals and defense
secretaries will be replaced, and different
priorities will be established.
But once relinquished, this non-pay
benefit will not be reinstated. Congress
and the Military community — don't
give it up on your watch.

Really.

AND NOW, A PLAN ...

Since it appears that plans to mobilize
actual commissary patrons
have not been fully exploited, it's time
to get a very tangible one started. The
ALA and the Coalition to Save Our
Benefit (SOB) have engaged their
valued associates in the Veterans Service
Organizations (VSO), but there is
a little trouble in paradise. The VSOs
have other fish to fry: Tricare, for one.

Those of us involved in the resale
market have been advised not to
lobby each other, and there's certainly
some sense in not preaching to the
choir, but there's also the question that
if this group doesn't mobilize patrons,
who the hell else will?

Industry has shown its ingenuity
and resolve a thousand times before,
and it can do so again. Engage commissary
shoppers. Use all the resources
at your disposal, including the Armed
Forces Marketing Council (AFMC);
and assign reps to commissaries —
especially in states with chairs, vice
chairs and ranking members on the
military-related appropriations subcommittees
in both the House and Senate —
to stand at the door with petitions, and
ask the shoppers to sign them. They
could present tens, perhaps hundreds,
of thousands of actual signatures to
these constituents' legislators and to
the White House and whoever else
will influence the course of events in
the next few months. The internet is
nice, and Capwiz has an important
role to play, but ground forces are
urgently needed in short order. The
clock is ticking.

We're not lawyers, but advocating
for this sort of cause doesn't appear
to conflict with DoD directives, and
certainly comes within First Amendment
rights to petition the government
for redress of grievances.

We know that brokers and vendor
partners would do all they can to ensure
this gets done. The material cost would
be minimal — printed petition forms,
clipboards and pens and letters to hand
out with some website information if
shoppers want to share with others.

Industry already knows when — on
paydays, when most shop; extra hours
expended to truly save the benefit would
make sense here. Thousands have been
spent already on other programs, with
— not very reassuringly — not much to
show for it … except the hope that the
compensation commission interviews
real shoppers (as by all accounts it has
not yet got round to the patrons who
would be most affected by the funding
cuts).

Time to engage your energies and
resources so that commissary patrons'
voices are heard where they can have
the most impact.

Maybe then things can get pointed
back in the right direction — building
sales, not stacking the deck to reduce
them.

To receive your own advance copy of the EandC News editorial each month,CLICK HERE!